@gary_c
Quote:

Why Bill McEwen stated that AmigaOS was an Amiga, Inc. asset... Why Fleecy Moss continued to refer to AmigaOS as if it were still owned... What threat to AmigaOS (presumeably from Genesi), which he referred to in his interview, existed prior to April 2003...

Keep on digging Mulder. The truth is out there!

_________________
ExecSG Team Lead

@gary_c

Quote:

Why he (Mr. Hare) referred to AmigaOS as "multiplatform" in his interview

Because it is. It runs on AmigaOne and Amiga Classic. And as it is hardware independent (it has a HAL), it will be usable on other platforms as well...

_________________
Philippe 'Elwood' Ferrucci
Sam460 1.10 Ghz
AmigaOS 4 betatester
Amiga Translator Organisation

@gary_c

Quote:

Why Bill McEwen stated that AmigaOS was an Amiga, Inc. asset in court depositions several months after it was sold to Itek and then KMOS.

Quote:

Why Fleecy Moss continued to refer to AmigaOS as if it were still owned by Amiga, Inc. for months after it was sold.

Would not these questions be better presented to those that actually did these things?Its unrealistic to ask Gary to speak for people about things which he may well know nothing about, and may well alienate the guy.
Quote:

Why KMOS or Itek or the concerned investors in some form didn't speak up or otherwise lend assistance when Amiga, Inc. lost their legal representation during the protracted court struggle with Genesi?

Its not the place of KMOS to form a rescue package for another company, nor it it the place of Gary to speak of other companies, and/or the actions they did or did not take.
Quote:

What threat to AmigaOS (presumeably from Genesi), which he referred to in his interview, existed prior to April 2003, that was so severe as to cause Itek and then KMOS to purchase AmigaOS away from Amiga, Inc.

Quote:

Garry: KMOS' strategy (which we hope makes sense) requires me to acquire or develop several pieces of a technical puzzle. Amiga's OS is an important part, but it is only one part.

There is your answer as to why KMOS bought it, yet once again, it is unrealistic to expect Gary to answer questions about the motivation of another company of which he has no part.If it is his opinion you want, then ask his opinion.

I see nothing good coming of these questions to someone who is not in a position to speak with authority on these matters and may well do nothing more than stir up trouble.

_________________

Quote:

gary_c wrote: Since you brought it up, I'd like to ask him: * Why Bill McEwen stated that AmigaOS was an Amiga, Inc. asset in court depositions several months after it was sold to Itek and then KMOS. ...... -- gary_c

Hi gary_c,

Ahhh, and 7 more questions of great concern....

The first 4 deal with the past, which aren't important to (me) where we're heading.

Quote:

gary_c wrote: * Why he (Mr. Hare) referred to AmigaOS as "multiplatform" in his interview.

My guess would be that he intends to market it as desktop (office, etc.)/server/home (entertainment, etc.) solutions, rather than referring to alternate CPUs (at the time of him answering that question, that is).

Quote:

gary_c wrote: * What specific features of AmigaOS convinced KMOS that purchasing AmigaOS was the right move for his targetted market.

Does it really matter? He likes it. I'm sure you already know, anyhow.

Quote:

gary_c wrote: * What specific features of AmigaOS give the platform an advantage over the competition in his target markets.

That's obvious.

Quote:

gary_c wrote: * If there is any reason to expect a flow of funds or other resources or benefits between KMOS (made possible by earnings from telecommunications market products) and Hyperion's desktop AmigaOS product development.

It would be stupid NOT to put more money into finishing AOS for PPC A1 and making >4.0 versions....but why does he need to answer that? When he can, he might, but he should bring it up, even if not asked.


For a person that probably will never buy an AmigaOne, you sure are inquisitive, I don't understand how your mind works.



AmigaOne! AOS4.0! The Darkness, the unknown, what the heck, let's try it!

@gary_c

Quote:

gary_c wrote: Since you brought it up, I'd like to ask him: * Why Bill McEwen stated that AmigaOS was an Amiga, Inc. asset in court depositions several months after it was sold to Itek and then KMOS. * Why Fleecy Moss continued to refer to AmigaOS as if it were still owned by Amiga, Inc. for months after it was sold.

Gary we know you like pushing your "shell games" idea onto this, but as everything existing to date points to the fact that KMOS is indeed a seperate company with no affiliation with Amiga Inc. These questions are as unreasonable as it would be to ask the CEO Buger King about why the executives at Diageo plc. did something.

Quote:

* What threat to AmigaOS (presumeably from Genesi), which he referred to in his interview, existed prior to April 2003, that was so severe as to cause Itek and then KMOS to purchase AmigaOS away from Amiga, Inc. (Keep in mind that this is the not the winter of 2004 we're talking about, when Genesi made statements about expanding the scope of the court decision from AmigaDE to include AmigaOS as well, but the spring of 2003, when the sale that didn't become public until 11 months later was said to have taken place.)

You are suggesting that there was a threat to that particular IP, when there is no evidence of such. You have invented a scenario and made it out to be fact. The interview stated the reasons why the IP was bought and why KMOS was formed.

Quote:

Well, this is off the top of my head. If I reread the interview or looked back at the sequence of events again, I imagine more ideas would come. These might not be the kinds of questions you had in mind, but in my opinion they would lead to much more interesting answers, if he actually answered them honestly, than the marketing fluff he's apt to deliver instead.

Very nicely done Gary. I may not agree with you views, but I continue to be impressed by your mastery of spin.